FalseFlagg K
Well-Known Member
ffs aren't there a zillion options for obtaining a wedding cake without going to all this bs ?? How hard is it to go pick up a packet of freaking white wings cake mix and do it for yourself
Supreme court supports Colorado baker in gay marriage cake controversy.
- Thread starter MVP
- Start date
Yep. Or that you live in a community with monopolized(or limited choice of) essential services that might refuse you service. This is the go-to example that I always give - it is very trivial and even somewhat funny when we are talking about wedding cakes or flower delivery services or wedding photographers... but imagine you live in a small town with a single private hospital and you rely on that hospital with no alternatives anywhere close enough to maintain your life. Now imagine this private business(the hospital) decides it doesn't want to serve blacks or muslims or gays or hell even Christians for whatever "deeply held belief" they might have. This is the whole reason for anti-discrimination laws that prevent businesses from discriminating against people based on certain characteristics.
The wedding cakes are trivial, the problem is when you extend this to a more broad context and see just how much private businesses can influence the lives of the 'wrong type' of people.
Probably quite hard if they were a thalidomide baby.
Last edited:
I agree. There is no reason a private citizen should be forced into baking anything for anyone they prefer to not bake for.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
You're using an example that wouldn't happen and comparing it to something inconsequential.
I personally think there should be some employee threshold for these mom and pop businesses, within reason. For example, the only gas station for miles won't sell gas to a gay dude, that would be ********. But a single woman running a photo business? Leave her alone. Let's say the threshold is 5 employees - random number.
Something trivial should be let be. So what if someone doesn't want to photograph your wedding? You're being a bigger ******* forcing them to than what you think the bigot is doing to you. Why on earth would you force someone who is disgusted by something to do something trivial? Are we living in Fear Factory? Where's Joe Rogan?
yeah, so I think you may have missed the point. Figurative language, it's a thing.
Same argument was used to defend Jim Crow laws. Just so you know.
Businesses and government institutions are not private citizens.
Would you be okay with forcing a fundamental Christian to sell a cake to Mormon, if their ideals include the belief that Mormons are cult that worships a false God?
Would you be okay if a Mexican American refused to serve food to any white patrons?
Discriminating on any of these bases seems pretty morally reprehensible.
How about a single woman that's the only wedding photographer in a 1-hour radius? What if the gas station only has two or three employees, are they still exempted?
Running a business, as opposed to doing something as a contractor or a private citizen, comes with certain government protections, and it's reasonable to expect certain behaviors from businesses you would not ask of private citizens.
You said "no reason" You did not say "no law" Are we having a discussion on morality or one on legality? I thought it was the former.
Mom-and-pop private enterprises are still businesses. They may not be corporations.
Regulations on small businesses are often different (more lenient) from corporations.
If we are having a discussion on morality, why did you bring up Jim Crow laws? I responded to you bring up laws.
Are you saying that I should be forced to bake for people I don't approve of (I don't bake for a living)? Does that depend upon whom I disapprove of? idestroyedthetoilet said his mom does not have a business. Why should we force her to do anything?
So, you are correcting my vocabulary? OK.
Not being snarky at all. Just making sure we are using the same words to mean the same thing, or else we are not communicating.
And just to be clear that just because someone is not incorporated, it does not give them the freedom to do "whatever" -- including discrimination (and no, I am not saying you said this).
Peace.
I said, "Same argument was used to defend Jim Crow laws." Immoral arguments led to immoral laws.
We force her to do lots of things. Not poison her customers. Not hire child laborers. Not refuse service to minorities. Meet any verbal contracts to provide services to customers. I could list a thousand things. Running a mom and pop business does not give anyone impunity. So So I really don't understand what you are saying.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
I specified trivial. Selling gas and food to someone should not be exempt no matter employee count. Forcing the only photographer in town, who is phobic of something, should. It's cruelty.
People are capable of doing this stuff on their own anyway. Rich world society seems to be losing that concept.
If you don't have a business, you don't have customers, or laborers. Any verbal contracts are between private citizens. If you don't have a business, you don't have a mom-and-pop business. It seems fairly clear to me. I'm not sure what you don't understand.
This is why I defined terms. We were talking about a person who makes and sells cakes. This is, by definition, a business (not necessarily a corporation). The people who buy the cakes are customers (by definition). An agreement to sell a certain cake at a certain cost on a certain date to be delivered to a certain place, is a contract (by definition) between the business and the customer.